A very serious question for libs

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
Did we vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

We absolutely did through our elected representatives. That is how our system is supposed to work. If we don't like how they vote we can vote them out of office. Not so with unelected judges.
 

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
This is not a pure democracy. By your line of thought, a state could "vote on it" and pass a law allowing for something heinous like slavery and the courts would be helpless to prevent it. Absurd.

This is not a pure democracy. By your line of thought, a state could "vote on it" and pass a law allowing for something heinous like slavery and the courts would be helpless to prevent it. Absurd.

So wrong on so many levels. If a state enacts something that is unconstitutional, the remedy is the courts. You have a keen misunderstanding of how our system was designed by our Founders.
 

Mntneer

New member
Oct 7, 2001
438,167
196
0
So wrong on so many levels. If a state enacts something that is unconstitutional, the remedy is the courts. You have a keen misunderstanding of how our system was designed by our Founders.

LOL..... That's EXACTLY what happened... and EXACTLY what you're bitching about. State's enacted laws that courts found unconstitutional (such as California), and eventually led to a vast majority of states having gay marriage.

Should have fought to not define marriage at the state level instead of fighting to ban gay marriage.
 

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
LOL..... That's EXACTLY what happened... and EXACTLY what you're bitching about. State's enacted laws that courts found unconstitutional (such as California), and eventually led to a vast majority of states having gay marriage.

Should have fought to not define marriage at the state level instead of fighting to ban gay marriage.

You're making zero sense. I am against the Supreme Court making law, as should all Americans. Many states defined marriage as between a man and woman. The Supremes overruled those states and claimed gay marriage was constitutional and taking it out of the hands of the people. BTW, Kagan testified in 2009 that gay marriage was not a constitutionally protect right. I guess in the intervening 6 years she "discovered" that it was.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
You're making zero sense. I am against the Supreme Court making law, as should all Americans. Many states defined marriage as between a man and woman. The Supremes overruled those states and claimed gay marriage was constitutional and taking it out of the hands of the people. BTW, Kagan testified in 2009 that gay marriage was not a constitutionally protect right. I guess in the intervening 6 years she "discovered" that it was.

You do realize this has been an extremely embarrassing day for you? Maybe you're too stupid to figure it out. Regardless, I owe you many thanks. I couldn't purchase entertainment this good.
 

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
LOL.... I'm done.....

Not intelligent enough to understand the difference. Typical low information voter. Let me try numbers to help you understand.

1. Many states passed laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman. A minority of states voted the opposite.

2. When appeals took place some Circuit Courts validated the single man/woman laws and some didn't (e.g. the 9th Circuit found the California law unconstitutional).

3. The Supreme Court took the case. SCOTUS could have found that each state can define marriage on their own. Instead, they found a right to gay marriage in the 14th Amendment. A right that the framers of the 14th Amendment would not have supported. That is the essence of making new law. They took it out of the hands of the people and require all states to license gay marriages.
 
Last edited:

WVPATX

Member
Jan 27, 2005
28,197
91
38
You do realize this has been an extremely embarrassing day for you? Maybe you're too stupid to figure it out. Regardless, I owe you many thanks. I couldn't purchase entertainment this good.

How so? I've exposed libs very poor understanding of our Constitution and our form of government.